Risk or Empire Total War

Teuner

Today my friends and I played Risk I don't know how but I just suck at it
However I thought it was more fun because you play with friends

But Risk is not the game for me because:
you suddenly get 10 more units only because you have 3 cards
there is no economic way of victory
there are no ship battles
Battles are unrealistic because with a gigantic force you can still loose because an unlucky roll with the dice

So what do you love more

-Play a fun game of Risk with your friends
-Play a serious game of Empire total war all alone

Attican

the latter

Risk isnt very great in comparison.

I litteraly have friends who think there better then me at ALL strategy because they beat me at RISK.

Spycrab

It always feels like I'm on the bad side of the luck on every RNG thingies.

Since I haven't found the appeal in Risk game, I stick to the TW game. Or DoW 2.

daelin4#9896

Risks relies entirely on rolling dice, AKA chance. Its meant to reflect the more unpredictable and uncontrollable aspects of war like chain of command and coincidence. As a game, player input is relatively minimal due to both dice rolling and little else than committing where "forces" go and where to attack. It's a relatively simple board game that methinks puts off a lot of players due to its abstractness as well as grindfest.

Total War is almost the opposite. A small army can defeat a horde because of the morale and upgrades, an entire army can be lost in a sea battle, economics and trade can limit how many units you can field, and upgrades allow existing units to become more useful. Its not like Risk where you just throw slightly less units away than you earn per turn.

Dalv

Risk is actually a very deep board game and is not entirely based on rolling the dice. Macromanagement plays a huge role and even an unlucky player can have a great time with enough patience.
Also the comparison is absurd but I won't emphasize this as I already feel it is too obvious.

darkstar

i once had a forty unit invasion stopped by five units, while i did eventually win the game, it was an example of how little you can do conquest wise besides troop numbers, attacking and retreating, i still enjoy risk, but its really not comparable to any TW title

Napoleon 2nd

No one plays either with me....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wWZ-EzgElz4

crimson_shade

what you should do is teach your friends to play TW, then you don't have to play alone anymore

Ace_Blazer

To tell you the truth, if I was to choose between a game of Risk with 3-4 other friends, or an ETW campaign (or any TW campaign for that matter) by myself, I'd go with Risk. Things can get super epic, the alliances, the betrayals, the inevitable "IN YOUR FAAACEEEE" victory moment and all within the space of a night (assuming you dont spend it all building up your forces). You can't have this level of connection with a computer. The basic gameplay is simple, but it focuses on the interaction which brings a good balance of fun and depth that you just can't copy with a big complex computer game.

Napoleon 2nd

Maybe. But still won't people play with me

daelin4#9896

I'd also go with Risk in Ace's scenario, but only marginally. It's the social part of the board game I like.

Napoleon 2nd

Yeah. But people i know hate board games and PC games. All they play is console games..

Bonfire

CA should develop a board game based on the total war series..... I would buy a copy for each of my friends who don't have high end computers.

Napoleon 2nd

That actually seems a good idea ^. But probbally impractical